#I've come to the conclusion i do not like bottoming and therefore i need a bratty bunny like. now. teehee <3< /div> Explore tagged Tumblr posts

[b1t3m3b1t3m3b1tem3]

need a bunny boy in my life rnnnnn

[wingsdippedingold]

The purpose of the mating bond (TL;DR at the bottom)

I was thinking about the mating bond (and consequently how much I hate it) and I started wondering about it's purpose. Apologies: This is barely organized rambling.

Our current explanations are: to create the most powerful offspring, and that the mates are perfect equals. We know its not romance since there are examples of unhappy mates so I'm ignoring that.

Rhysand suspected he was Feyre's mate while she was still human, aka before she was a high fae, and they were still mated after she was. This means that the bond doesn't care about physical bodies, which would play a part in powerful children since fae are just supposed to be so much better than humans in EVERY WAY. Therefore it had nothing do with offspring, but knowing SJM Nyx is gonna be even more powerful as an adult because her favs need to be worshipped like gods.

If the purpose was to create the most powerful offspring that wouldn't even work logistically? The two most powerful beings being mated would work, but everyone after that, not so much. Its kinda weird to explain so imagine 4 fae, their power ranking aligning with their number. 1 & 2 are mated because as the most powerful, their children would then also be the most powerful. With Rhys logic, 3 & 4 would be mated. But 3 & 4 child would be much less powerful than a 1 & 3 child, so that mate bond wouldn't produce the most powerful offspring. Of course the mother could just go by pairing the next most powerful people, but we've seen examples where even then that's not what happens. Of course unique combinations of genes could lead to powerful kids without the need of powerful parents, but considering Rhysand's high lord father was mated with an average Illyrian mother, that doesn't always seem to be the case.

Okay so power aside, the other explanation is that the two mates are two equal halves. Sure? I guess? But that seems to be a product of being mated rather than the reason. Rhysand's parents had huge power imbalances and their personalities didn't mesh. Sure, you could be equal without compatible personalities but power and livelihood? I find it hard to believe.

The mating bond is so inconvenient for it to be a reasonable way of getting any offspring produced in the first place. Rhysand and Cassian were both mated to people from the human world, of course those humans came to the fae world so their mating bond lines up with fate. BUT. They went 500 years without a mate just to end up with 20 yr old women as mates? Same thing with Rhysand's parents. A 900 YEAR OLD MAN AND A 19 YEAR OLD WOMAN. WHAT THE FUCK. High fae rarely leave their courts too, and considering everyone supposedly has a mate, most of their mates would be in other courts, whom they'll never meet. The fate argument that works for Feysand and Cassian fails here, because a mating bond being found is so incredibly rare (except for the fact all three archeron sisters found theirs) that it has nothing to do with fate and circumstance.

Nessian. I hate it with my entire heart. Their ENTIRE romance plot was Cassian domesticating Nesta. He consistently abused and ridiculed her, but Oh! They're mates! So it's out of love! Get out. Pack your 50 shades of domestic violence and get out. That man bitch laughed at her as she fell down the stairs, locked her in a house, insulted and made fun of her regularly, and lusted after her emaciated body while she was clearly struggling. He does not give a fuck about Nesta. They were happy at the end! SO WHAT. That doesn't change the way he acted. She kept pushing away his advances and he didn't not care. The same goes for Feysand but I've already discussed them enough.

Considering all of this, I have come to a conclusion!

SJM used the mating bond as an excuse to not have to write compelling romances that actually make sense and instead a fast track to poor fairy porn and her kinks.

[lindszeppelin]

I've been attempting to like K but there isn't much to her. She doesn't engage with her audience despite having a book club and actively telling ppl to join. Speaking of that book club, it doesn't read(no pun intended) as genuine. There are posts on the official book club account that are about her modeling rather than books. Obviously, she's also a model but that's not her main account, I don't even think she runs the book club account. I've come to the conclusion that the book club is nothing more than a way to make her look like she has any sense of personality and like she's relatable/down to earth(even though buying a shit on of books and having the time to read most of them is privileged af if you really think about). It's all about image and exposure with her. No work, no lessons, no earning it. I think a while back I remember watching some cast interviews from "Bottoms" bc I'm Bi and love comedy, anyway, they were individual quick interviews(looked like they were onset in the gym) and I get to her interview. *deep sigh* She mostly talked about how funny Rachel and Ayo are and how much they improvised but something that stuck out to me was that she said she was excited hearing about the movie being made that she sent in a video of herself for the role without ever waiting for auditions to come around and do it the proper way. Which disappointed me back then and pisses me off now that I've seen "Bottoms". The movie itself was kinda boring and every time she opened her mouth I was unimpressed with her attempt. Her character is meant to be flat and monotone, I think? But I'm pretty sure the character comes off like that bc they had to mold it to her lack of acting abilities. Which could have been avoided if they had auditioned for the role. Anyway, the rant is long but I had to get it out! I wish I could just tolerate her at least, but nepobabies make me want to rip my hair out. "Kaia Gerber swears she's a small town girl at heart"...well if she stepped foot in my town she'd run back to the hills out of sheer boredom and to get away from the bigoted folks, lmao. Ah well, I'm done bitching; Have a great day, Lindsay! ^_^

You are not wrong about the bookclub stuff, and everything else you said. It is very common for a lot of actresses to have bookclubs. Literally everywhere you look you see another book club made by a celebrity. And my understanding is that the reason why some of these bookclubs exist is that the rights to the books mentioned in the club are in part shared with the celeb hosting the book club...and therefore if a book featured on the club gets made into a movie that they can either star in the movie or just have the rights to it. it's not always as simple as an author talks about their book. most of the celeb book clubs are the ones where the rights to said book are shared with the celebrity. they basically get dibs on starring in the adaptation. and library science is definitely run by somebody else, not by her.

and yes, she takes up so much space in the industry. other actresses that need their break or need a job could have taken her place and actually helped a lot of these projects. having kaia on cheapens them.

[crystalelemental]

Today has been an absolute fucking shitshow.

I want to preface this with the knowledge that this cat is the first pet I've really had. My family had dogs, but it was...let's just say it was not a good situation, and we tended to get rid of the dogs before they were in a position to be put down. So a lot of this is new to me, I don't know what's normal, and every time we talked about the situation to people, we got the same response: "You're doing this right, it's better to go a day early than a day late."

To jump to the conclusion: babycat is still alive. The vet did come over, and talked about how all things considered, she still seemed in decent condition. Super lethargic and a little raspy, but apparently the fact she's still eating is sufficient to say she's doing okay. But he checked her lungs too, and apparently they're surprisingly clear? So like. Okay. Strongest diseased lungs. Far surpassing expectations on life expectancy. He said she would likely survive through New Years, into the week they'd be open again.

So okay, now the fuckery.

This was scheduled for 12-2. Somewhere in there, hard to say exactly when given schedules run late sometimes, but in that area. We get a call at 12:20, asking when we're bringing her in. ...no, you're coming to us. That was the entire reason for scheduling this, was that she's scared to go to the office and scared to go in her carry case by association. We're not doing that to her. After some apologies and an explanation that they don't usually do in-home for cats (but do for dogs, go fucking figure), in addition to my wife cancelling because I couldn't talk I was crying so hard, and them calling back to offer coming out after hours due to the mix-up, we were back on for this. Only for him to show up, look at her, and ask us what made us think this was the time. As if you didn't tell us we needed to schedule in advance for in-home.

So at this point, we're not doing in-home. This is the only local vet, but to be honest, this was a disaster. He doesn't even seem to remember that he scheduled this appointment for us personally with this condition in mind. And when we talked about options, and how the in-home could be scheduled again but if something happens before then, what do? My bottom line was, if we needed to, we could bring her in. All I would ask is that we be there with her.

And we could not get a straight answer. He didn't say no, but he sure didn't say yes. If anything it sounded like the expectation is drop off the pet and he'll do it between appointments. Which. No. I'm not bringing her, leaving her, alone and scared, until they decide they can sneak it in.

We were so clear about all of this. I cannot stress enough that we spent that entire appointment doing nothing but talking about needing to be there and therefore doing it at home. And it fell through spectacularly. Worse than I could've imagined. And now we're being told that, if we don't schedule in advance for the home visit, that we may not even be able to stay with her when they do have to put her down? No. No, we will travel the hour to an urgent care when it's time, and we will be staying with her. I'm so done with this. I'm so mad.

The good news is, cat remains. Her diseased baby lungs are still powerful, it seems. She's definitely on the decline, but we get more time, and we're not agonizing over whether it's too soon or whatever. We're going somewhere they'll let us stay with her. I don't know how long it will be. She declined quickly and this may come on quickly. But I am far, far too tired now to think about this. My baby is still alive, and as long as she is, we're going to take care of her. And when it's her time to go, we're going to be there with her, no matter how far we have to go to make it happen.

[lucyhannahart]

Major Project Update 12/1/23-17/1/23

12/1/23

The final major project is an amalgamation of everything learnt during my time at university. To reflect the skills I have learnt, both practical and theoretical, my response to the brief needs to be a fully realised output utilising several different forms of media.

My initial idea was formed off the back of my previous project, in which I created a prototype for a website in response to the lingerie industry and its’ shortcomings - particularly when it comes to its’ misrepresentation of minority groups and the predatory approach of photographers and other creative executives. The content I created for this spanned photography to screenprinting to blogging. In order to take 'burn down the mansion' further, I am going to fully realise the website and publish it publicly, create an accompanying Instagram to make sure my content can reach as large of an audience as possible, and document the process and context of this movement in a documentary film.

My first aim for this project is to set the goals I'd like to achieve by developing the above ideas. The goals are as follows:

Reach 5k followers on the BDTM Instagram page by the deadline for this project (March 28th 11:59 p.m.)

Publish the pre-existing BDTM website with 5 posts

Create a documentary film, minimum 10 minutes long, which includes the following: introduction, context, evidence, proposal of my solution, outcome, impact of outcome, conclusion, credits

Guerilla marketing strategy to gain an audience's attention, spanning wider than just those with an interest in fashion

The first step in beginning this project is to create the Instagram page. In order to engage as many people as possible, this page needs to have strong visual outputs, engaging content and a message that people either relate to or are intrigued by. To start with, I began to create a logo. This will be used as the profile picture for the Instagram and as a visual cue - something eye-catching which intrigues those who may see it in passing on a sticker or in an Instagram advertisement.

Below are the initial designs I drew for a logo. Lexy, a close friend of mine, gave some very valuable feedback. For the designs featuring a distressed Playboy bunny logo, they raised the fact that the use of the logo could infringe upon the copyright laws Playboy has in place. They stated that, though this logo was their favourite, I may not be able to use it. They did also enjoy the design which featured the mansion. The final piece of feedback Lexy gave me was that the font seemed too 'serious' and that I may benefit from using a more playful font. However, when I explained that the existing website has a more serious tone, she suggested using a bolder version of a serif font.

15/1/23

I created the Instagram page on the 15th and will be doing regular follower updates so I can track the growth of the page. In order to start posting, I wanted the page to look as good as possible, therefore I began creating the logo.

I asked for further feedback from Lexy and Amelia who are both on the illustration course at Kingston. They both agreed that the strongest version of the logo was the one including the torn up version of the Playboy bunny. They also raised the point that the mansion does not necessarily immediately come across as being related to Playboy. This may be a positive as it reduces the chance of me accidentally infringing upon copyright laws and I don't think I want the project to centre around Playboy too much.

I also received some feedback from my boyfriend Matt who stated that the second logo on the bottom was his favourite. He said that modifying it slightly to include less detail in the mansion drawing would pull more focus to the text, which I agree with.

I've chosen the second logo on the bottom I created to act as a preliminary logo, as I don't want to spend all my time focusing on logos as this will delay the launch of the Instagram page. I may end up going back to edit this at a later date. I created a few variations to choose between for now and opted for one in which the background was black and the mansion was inverted with a lower opacity.

17/1/23

I have now started to add more content to the Instagram page. This includes story posts, changing the logo and adding a bio. At this point, I felt really stuck and uninspired, not knowing where to turn for inspiration. I made a mental note to mention this during my group meeting on Thursday to see if either my tutor, Odella, or my peers could give me some direction.

When finding a tone of voice for BDTM, I wanted something engaging yet not too serious, that did not come off as pandering or too informal. This is why I struggled to write the caption of the first Instagram post, as I felt that this needed to set the tone for the project and immediately let people know what 'burn down the mansion' was going to be like.

[lmdhawk]

[Image ID Image 1: A post by someone whose name has been cut off, but the bottom half of their profile picture looks like colored rocks. "Oh, for that they will need a double ended audio cable (3.5mm plug at either end)

Plug one end into the headphone jack and tell the computer it is headphones. Plug the other end into the mic jack and tell the computer it is a microphone.

Then you can use any free audio editing software to create your own DRM free mp3 file of any online audio source.

Then you can freely burn that file to a CD

It is called the 'Analog Hole because digital DRM can't read or block analog devices. It is part of the real reason why Apple got rid of headphone jacks."

Image 2: GIF of a burning skeleton clinging to a chain link fence.

End Image ID]

I fell like a lot of you are missing the point of the explanation. Because if you read it, the instructions say *how to get a DRM free mp3*, which can then be burned onto a CD. The drag and drop method only works if you have the files on your computer already.

Who ever wrote this made the same assumption: Any who had the tools to be able to burn CDs would be able to intuit fairly easily (Fun fact: my current computer, a desktop that requires a separate monitor, does not have a CD drive. Access to a certain type of computer is not as universal as it once was). Therefore, when asked, they assumed they were actually asking something more complicated like : How do I take a song from Spotify or one of those "you can buy a stuff but only play it on our app" things like Google Music, and burn it onto a CD. To do that, you need to get the mp3 file.

Which means that whoever wrote the explanation and everyone up in the notes share the same conclusion: Burning a CD is so easy that it shouldn't require much of an explanation.

I think that's actually a disservice to whoever might be genuinely asking, because they missed out on the days before playlists, mixed CDs were super common, or they just never quite grasped it. Imaging not knowing and then asking, and getting this answer, and even if you did follow it, all you have is mp3 files, not a CD.

So, here's how to burn a CD:

Step 1: make sure you have a computer with a CD drive available.

Step 2: Make sure that the music you want is a file on your computer.

Step 2b: If not, what is it?

A file on another device? Flash drives are your friend. If one device isn't flashdrive compatible, emailing as an attachment works too, or a micro to macro USB file transfer. (I'm almost certain that whatever BS iPhones have instead of a microUSB also allows for hooking up to a computer, since the other end it a USB)

Another CD? Put it in your computer's disc drive and you should have something like "windows media player" open up to let you play it. There is a button called "rip CD". Click it, then wait until it's done before removing the CD.

A song on Youtube? This is less than legal, so be sure to check your local laws and make an informed decision if you want to violate them, but you should be able to search the internet for "mp3s from youtube videos" and find an online converter.

A song on Spotify or Google Music? Your going to need to find it on youtube, buy it on Band camp, which will let you download the mp3, or resort to the above method of tricking the computer with an audio cable.

Step 3: Buy blank CDs. They usually come in sets of 50 or 100. Keep the ones you don't use for later.

Step 4. Open up the program that lets you play your music and double check that the songs you want on your CD are there.

Step 5: Put a blank CD in to the CD drive.

Step 6: If you've gathered all the songs you want into a playlist, there should be a burn to CD button

Alternately: open the file menu, and you should see the CD listed there as being in the drive. Use the drag and drop method to put the mp3 or other compatible files into it.

Please note: I haven't done this in years, and I've only ever used my computers built in CD drive, but this should give you a pretty good base to go forward if you've never burned a CD before.

ohhh my god seeing a post about how to burn a cd thats like ummm ok girliepops! and then 800000000 steps. get a cd burner and drag and drop the songs. you cannot possibly be this helpless!

[sagemusesoutloud]

Anti-Romantic, Part 4

(credit to the original owner of the image)

Character | Jaehyun x reader

Genre | nonidol!au, Mutual Pining, Slowburn, Fluff, Angst

WordCount | 1.5 k

WARNING | Mentions of verbally abusing relationships! It's brief, but there. If you or anyone is going through something similar, please seek outside help!

Author'sNote | I'm not giving excuses as to why it took so long to update, but I'm trying my hardest to be consistent! Let me know if you like how the story is going so far!

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 4.5

Sorry I’m an anti-romantic, I don’t believe in romantic

I am afraid that it will burn my whole heart, It will only leave behind ashes.

When you were younger, your family used to call you ‘spitfire.’ They said you were too fiery, argued too well, and too passionate. They had never meant it as an insult, in a way, it was a form of flattery. You grew up as the only female cousin in your family, but you were always leading your cousins on whatever diabolical plan it was that you had come up with: sneaking off to kitchen in the middle of the night to eat all the pastries meant for the morning after, convincing everyone that leaving your grandma’s territory and into the forest in the middle of the night to see if you can find the fairies, racing along the town’s border to see who was the fastest on their bike, and many other child-like plans. You were tough and you were proud, you never allowed yourself to lose.

Later on in life, that same nickname evolved to a less loving version. As you grew older and started to date, your partners always called you out for having strong opinions and for not bending at their will. They never saw you for what you wanted to be; which was an equal. If they said something against one of your friends, they expected you to throw away the friendship. All because they were the opposite sex and made your partner insecure. How could a girl and boy only be friends? Later on, when rumors would spread about your partner and other girls, they would get exasperated with you. If they’d get caught, they would only blame you for being too stiff.

“Why couldn’t you be more passive? If I want to kiss you, I’ll kiss you. You’re my girlfriend, why the fuck would I need permission? Is that what your ‘guy friends’ do? I bet you’ve let them all have a run at you, huh? Keep acting like a bitch, get treated like a bitch. And you wonder why I cheated? What a joke.”

You had to admit, you didn’t really date the greatest of guys. But you could say that now, because you knew now. Back then, you really thought you deserved those kinds of relationships. Like how they say, you only accept the love you think you deserve. However, in a way, it was why you were the way you were now. You always made it a point to communicate and avoid misunderstandings because you didn’t want your partners to throw your words back at you or your actions. It’s why you treaded carefully and avoided one-night stands. You’d rather get to know a person first and then start dating. It’s the exact reason the date you had with that other barista didn’t go through, majority of the guys you talked to thought you were too much work and therefore, not worth it.

Now that you’re an adult, you’d rather be too much work than let a guy walk all over you. Boundaries were important to you because how else were you supposed to gauge their respect for you? You had a tight grip on your morals and rules.

But damn, you’re only human!

The moment your lips crashed, it’s as if the only thing you could keep in mind was one word.

More.

You needed more of him, needed to breathe the same air as him, needed to feel every ridge of his hard body against your soft one, needed to cling to him as close as possible and for as long as possible.It’s as if his lips were the only reason you needed to dive into whatever this was. You were tired of keeping a strong hold on yourself. All that boiling anger turning into dangerous tension, and the only way to release it was to give into the passion between you two.

You settled your arms around his neck, taking that last step closer into him as he cradled your face and deepened the kiss. His other arm wound tightly around you, hand sliding dangerously close to your ass. You feel a deep groan against your chest, one of your hands wandering down his torso, enjoying the shiver you feel as you move lower. His tongue swipes at your bottom lip, a question, so you reply by opening your mouth, tongues fighting for dominance. For every move you delivered, he retaliates just as ardently. You feel your head grow lightheaded as you bring your hands to hold on to his shirt, anything to stabilize you. His hand finally squeezing your ass, shifting you closer to his hips. Oh, lord.

You let out a moan as he bites your lower lip, his kisses descending as you fight to catch your breath. You involuntary let out a whimper as he finds your pulse point and sucks the skin, soothing it with light kisses. Leaving behind a trail of purple blotches, beautifully contrasted against your skin. You’d never been into marking, had it always felt this good?

“Jae…” you can’t think, you can’t even stand properly as he pushes you with his hips against the counter for support. You don’t even know what you wanted to say, do you want to ask for more? What do you want?

“God, I’ve wanted to do this for years.” You pause at that, your hands freezing on their tight grip on his shirt. You feel as if someone had just dumped a bucket of ice water at you, your rationality finally catching up with you.

He leans back to look at you, “if you’re going to stop me, do it now because if you don’t say anything I’ll keep going. And I don’t think I can stop on my own.” His hands drawing gentle, tantalizing circles along your hips where your shirt had ridden up.

You gasp at that; finally bring your eyes to his. He looked exactly how you felt, desperate. His lips were red and puffy from your kisses, his hair messy after running your hands through it. In the light of the kitchen, you could still see how his pupils were blown wide. You’re pretty sure you’re not in any better condition.

“Jae,” you whisper, brining your hands to his shoulders, either to support yourself or to brace yourself for what you were about to say, “if we do this, there’s no going back.”

He lets out a deep breath, “I know, and I’m ok with that.” He offers a gentle smile, “I want that.” His heart drops as he notices how you drop your gaze and bite your lips.

“if we do this, can you guarantee that it won’t ruin our friendship?” for some reason, you can’t bring yourself to speak higher than a whisper or to look at him. “can you promise that you won’t run away again?”

You wait for his response. When it doesn’t come you finally look up, only to find a frown forming on his brow. You don’t expect when he takes a step back, “is that all I am to you? All this is? Just a risk you’re not willing to take just because you don’t want to ruin the ‘friendship’?”

“I don’t know…Am I supposed to forget what you just said a few minutes ago?” He gives a humorless laugh as he paces around the small kitchen.

You’re frozen in place, spaced out at his words. It’s like as if you’re watching yourself from somewhere else. But you think about it, is that what it is?

Before you can respond or come to a conclusion, he stops at the entrance to the kitchen, back towards you. “Are you really not understanding what I’m saying or are you avoiding it?” his shoulders sag but he keeps going, “If loosing me is what you’re so worried about, then let me make it simple for you.”

Your body grows number by the second, what’s wrong with you? You’ve finally done it, burned away the last semblance of security and friendship. Just like a thoughtless spitfire.

“I can’t go back to this back and forth bullshit. I’m tired. I don’t think you even know what you want, so until you do, I think I need my space.”

He motions towards his front door, “I’m gonna go, if you’re still here by the time I come back, I’ll take it as a sign that you do want us…to happen. If you leave, I’ll pretend the last two days didn’t happen and we can go back to how we used to be. I’ll never cross the line again, and I’ll do everything to move on.”

You only notice you’re sobbing when you tears blur your vision. What have you done?

You don’t even hear him leave, only when the door slams after him.

I can clearly see the end, Worse than a hangover

It will be hard, Now, Just end it somewhere here

EndNote | Damn, I've never written a kiss scene before. Hopefully it wasn't too awkward. This is a lot of angst too, which I'm not a big fan of reading, but wow... who hurt me lmao. Promise the next chapter won't be as bad, or will it?

Previous: Part 3 | Next: Part 4.5

[chibimyumi]

Hi there! So I've been meaning to ask this for a while after realizing it, but don't O!Ciel's, Doll's, Alois', and Lizzy's color schemes kind of reveal their past and future a tad bit? I've know Alois outfits are bold yet kind of gothic colors like violet emerald green black and brown which all in the world of art are color forms of different emotions depending how you work with them, green being envy or disgusted but he hides it with royal purple, black means wounded which are his shorts & tie

Dear Blackbutlerfandomnerddomain,

While colour symbolism is popular, I personally don’t think the colours in Kuroshitsuji’s costumes are supposed to deliver any meaning other than aesthetic value. Especially with O!Ciel and Lizzie we can say with some certainty colour symbolism is not within the intention, because they change clothes in every single illustration, and every time they wear different colours. Yes, these characters do have tones they tend to wear, but that’s how real people dress themselves too. Somebody who likes calm colours is slightly less likely to have a rainbow assortment of neon, for example.

This is simply the way I understand Yana’s style, there’s not really ONE correct answer here. So feel free to read as much into the colours as it pleases you. But as I personally see it, Yana’s style of using symbolism tends to rely on objects rather than colours. Allow me to briefly analyse two artworks to illustrate what I mean and how I came to my understanding.

Case One

One of the most famous artworks is the front illustration of the second illustration book. Many colours including green, red, blue, white, gold are all present here.

One could make arguments for the black and white of the Earl’s attire being symbolism, but this meaning is quickly overshadowed by the ravens emerging from the Escher patterns. Red is the most eye-catching colour in this illustration. One might say O!Ciel’s gloves being red means to symbolise his hands being blood-dyed, or his shoes red because he walks a bloody path... but then how do we explain the inside of the drape or Sebastian’s waistcoat?

The setting is a place that appears to be a type of greenhouse; a place built to maximise the function of sunlight. And yet, while the illustration seems to suggest it is daytime, the sun is failing miserably in face of the heavy clouds. Rather than painting the sky ominous red or just dark, Yana uses the unsuccessful sun to set a mood or convey symbolism. “Is the white light against the dark clouds not also a type of colour symbolism?” Yes, it may be, but then one should also ask the question: "why choose a greenhouse then, and not any other setting that could have conveyed the light/dark contrast?”

Case two

Another famous piece is this 2014 artwork. The overall tone is gloomy and is mostly lacking in colours. Though held back in terms of colour, there is a lot to be unpacked here!

The first thing that catches the eye is indeed the overwhelmingly sombre palate of this illustration. Black can symbolise many things, but when 70% of the illustration is black, one could say this illustration is either incompetent in conveying symbolism in it being over-saturated with “meaning”, or that the black is merely here to set a tone.

Instead, we can see white lilies in O!Ciel’s hair as well as one stem carried by Sebas. Rather than colour symbolism, Japan has a long history of flower-symbolism (花言葉・Hanakotoba), and Yana herself is big fan of this style. When Western culture was introduced to Japan, black and white lilies were accepted as symbols for death.

The composition of the artwork leads the eye from the bottom left corner to the top right. This guides our vision to the empty plate at the top of the table, where a bright white saucer lies with a conspicuous bit of red sauce.

Red might symbolise blood here, and it is befitting. But more importantly we also need to consider this choice from an artist’s point of view. How many different colours of edible sauces are there? There’s chocolate sauce and other dark sauces, but that would just blend in with the rest of the illustration. Yellowy sauce is certainly a thing, but that’d be overpowered by the golden details. So red is the only bright colour that would make the empty saucer pop out. The Empty saucer has a fork placed diagonally on top, meaning that somebody had consumed food and is now finished. Rather than the colour of red, I think it is the now-empty saucer that is supposed to symbolise Sebastian’s goal of consuming his master.

Next to the saucer is the skeleton of a bird; presumably a crow judging from the size. Skeletons universally symbolise death, but it has nothing to do with the colour.

In Japanese native culture the topic of ‘death’ is big taboo. In older Japanese buildings for example, the 4th floor would often be skipped because ‘4′ (四・shi) is a homophone of death (死・shi).

In the past when Buddhism was introduced, the Japanese embraced this religion with open arms because finally there was something else that would deal with ‘death’ while native culture could stay in its comfort-zone. It was a bit like: “we do we... Hey, Buddhism, can you take care of that thing we’re too afraid of for us? Thanks dude!” Since the introduction of Buddhism, images of skeletons came to not just mean ‘death’, but more specifically ‘impermanence’ (無常・mujou). Impermanence is one of the core teachings in Buddhism, reminding humanity that everything will eventually come to an end, be it good or bad. With Buddhism introduced, skeletons were no longer only associated with pure fear, but instead gained an additional meaning of acceptance of change and the cycle of nature.

The origins of the meaning of skeletons have blurred through the years, many Japanese people probably don’t even know why things evoke certain meanings in them (just like in other cultures, I presume). But fact remains that though still macabre, in Japan a skeleton is now assumed to symbolise the naturalness of death.

That the skeleton of the bird is preserved in a glass dome is interesting. Glass domes’ function is primarily display. Out of all things, Yana chose to specifically display the symbol of impermanence and death, meaning that within this artwork that skeleton is the key object of display. In human subjectivity death is finite and fearsome. To a demon like Sebastian however (from whose perspective we view this artwork as he’s the only one awake here), he probably views death more akin to the way Buddhism views it; as just impermanence. I am NOT saying that Sebastian subscribes to a Buddhist philosophy, but I am saying that he must view death a lot more neutrally than most humans do.

Most Japanese people are not raised consciously religiously, but everyone is always influenced to some extent, Yana included. And therefore it is no surprise that Yana might have been inspired by the neutral view towards death (for at least Sebastian), even if she might not know where this inspiration comes from.

The casualness of ‘death’ in this illustration is further indicated by the coffin that is set up as a dining table. There is no respect, no ceremony, objects are scattered on top and around. The message is rather straightforward so I shall waste no more time explaining the obvious here. But I do wish to point out how this gives further evidence for how the meanings of this illustration should be considered from Sebas’ perspective, just like the crow’s skeleton as explained above. What is finite to us, is just a fact of nature to Sebas.

Conclusion

Yana has created many illustrations. Not all include symbolism, but the more elaborate pieces are usually packed with them. Of course I have only analysed two illustrations, and I would not blame anyone for calling this post insufficient evidence. But... I could just go on and on forever, and I need to draw a line somewhere, right? What I can say with confidence however, is that if you were to grab any artwork by Yana and see it for yourself, rather than colour, item symbolism is stronger.

Also, the way Yana uses colour is just not very symbolism heavy; she has a much stronger tendency to use colours purely aesthetically. Take any of the inside covers of this series, and one would quickly find out there really is no pattern to be found here.

In a nutshell, Yana’s colouring style is mostly aesthetic and used to set a tone for her illustrations. What carries the symbolism instead is in the objects.

Again, this is merely how I personally read Yana’s illustrations and an elaboration of how I came to this reading. There is not one correct answer to read illustrations, because art is subjective in its core. So if the colours do mean more to you than they do to me, please do enjoy doing so by all means ^^

[mental-health-advice]

Hello, this is Alexa again. I know my last ask is towards the top of the tag list right now. At this point, the content inside it is somewhat irrelevant. Can you please answer this ask instead?

I think my parents are emotionally abusive. I've read lists if things associated with emotional abuse, and they do most of them. When they're "nice" they're a mix of like Mother Gothel, and Agatha (before we knew she was evil) from WandaVision. It's not too noticable that what they're doing is abuse. They won't say I'm not allowed to be alone, but if I leave the room they immediately make me come back for family time. They say I'm not allowed to feel "bad emotions" (sadness, anger, etc.), because "nothing bad has ever happened to me", and that's not even true. They yell, make threats, and just act like bullies for no reason. I don't feel safe around them. We aren't close. I have to pretend to be a completely different person just to stay safe. I want to mostly cut them off when I'm older, and even somewhat now, but I feel like I can't. What if I'm wrong, and they're not actually abusive. Would cutting them off in that case make me a bad person?

Hey lovely,

I think we did answer your ask (here). I’m sorry that we weren’t able to answer this current one any sooner, but due to the way tumblr organises inboxes, it isn’t really possible for us to swap asks with each other. We work from bottom to top and therefore we hadn’t seen that you wanted this one answered instead of the other one. My apologies!

Emotional abuse comes in many forms and shapes. I’m sorry to hear that you’ve been having to deal with it! It can certainly be really tough. I can imagine that you don’t feel safe around them. It definitely doesn’t sound like a safe environment.

I personally don’t think cutting someone off would make you a bad person, regardless of whether their behaviour is abusive. What matters most is how they make you feel. They make you feel not safe and that in itself is a valid reason to cut off contact. You don’t need to prove yourself against anyone. If you feel like it would be beneficial for you to cut off contact with them, then you have every right to do so.

From what you’ve told me, it also does sound like they indeed show emotionally abusive behaviours. We have a list with signs of emotional abuse that you might want to look through. It’s not conclusive (as in, there will be other forms of emotional abuse that aren’t listed on there), but it gives you an idea. And what you mention is listed on there. So your feelings are completely valid!

But, know that you can step up for yourself regardless of whether their behaviour is abusive or not. You deserve to feel safe.

Sometimes what seems impossible, is just hard. Love Pauline

[unbidden-yidden-deactivated20240]

I've been seeing more discourse about this again and I've been doing more thinking about this so I'm going to give my own answers to these questions:

I think we should start describing behavior and ideas, not people, as culturally Xtian, unless they personally identify with that label, or are people like my family who are atheists yet still deeply involved in church. (They're basically the Xtian version of Jewish atheists who always come help make minyan, so I think it's a fair comparison and I don't think this type of person would even argue.)

But if it's something that's being called out? It should be about the behavior and ideas rather than the person.

If you're calling it out, it should be because it's actually harmful in some way, and that harm should be named and explained. If it's an antisemitic trope that is fundamentally supercessionist, just say that.

If you're thinking, "gee, that could be accomplished without using that phrase at all," then you're starting to reach the same conclusion with it that I am.

The way people have used it on here is functionally meaningless because it's only ever used to describe atheists, agnostics, and new religions, but not people of other minority religious groups, whether they were raised Xtian and converted or not. If you're really talking about anyone raised in a Xtian-dominant society, then it needs to address everyone in that society to the extent that their behavior and ideas reflect that upbringing.

This is not to say that people can't be talked about in the aggregate as identifiable groups, because that's how discussions of privilege really should theoretically work. But even in that case, it's not about individual interpersonal relationships and how it plays out in anyone's specific lives, but rather about systemic power. If there's not actually systemic power, then it needs to be talked about differently. And it shouldn't typically be used to describe individuals at all.

I think a lot of this discourse came about because too many of us have had to deal with antisemitism from anti-theists, and it gets real old real quick. There's not a non-bigoted way to be an anti-theist, because you are inherently shitting on all minority religions. Your justifications for this are boring, pointless, and racist/antisemitic.

But! Not all atheists are anti-theists, not even all ex-xtian atheists. Far from it.

Bottom line: I'm annoyed that this useful, but specific, term has been used often enough as a cudgel that it has lost a lot of its meaning in the ensuing vagueness, and therefore is now going to raise hackles rather than awareness.

On the other hand, there are still plenty of people who are spitting out everything from blood libel to supercessionism to cultural genocide, supposedly under the guise of anti-theism, which is often relabeled as merely atheism, because at some level these people know they're vile and their ideas are harmful and want to cover that up. This needs to stop, and too often I've heard crickets from the rest of the not actively shitty atheist communities on here.

So I guess the takeaway here is this: let's lay off of the atheists, agnostics, and new religionists who aren't actually engaging in harmful behavior or spreading harmful ideas by painting them with too broad a brush, and in return I'd ask that goyische atheists believe us and back us up even (especially) against antisemitism coming out of your communities. And ffs kick out any remaining anti-theists like the bigots they are.

Okay so I feel like I may be swinging a bat at a hornets nest here, but please hear me out. I'm asking this genuinely and hoping for an actual discussion on this.

This is an excellent and insightful thread that I'd ask you to read in full first because I am writing this after reading it; however, this is definitely part of a larger conversation on tumblr so it's not a direct response to just this post. Also that thread is so long already and OP seems pretty done with it, so I don't want to blow it up (again.)

---

At what point does someone stop being culturally Xtian? Is there a threshold past which someone has actually done enough unpacking of Xtian ideas and assumptions to ever escape it? Do you have to literally join another culture to overwrite Xtian culture? Does that, by itself, actually even fix it?

I guess what I'm struggling with here is this: are we talking about a behavior that people engage in, and can therefore escape by not doing that behavior or thinking in that way anymore? Or are we talking about a set of privileges that one cannot ever truly leave behind?

If it's the former, then I think it would be more appropriate, more accurate, and more respectful (especially to survivors of Xtian religious abuse) to describe the behavior rather than the person. Because at the end of the day, this person, no matter how obnoxious - and trust me when I say I've been on the receiving end of this obnoxiousness and sometimes outright antisemitism plenty - isn't a Xtian* and isn't necessarily defined by this behavior. It's one thing if they define themselves by a bigoted behavior - a self-identified t//erf is a transphobe by their own definition, for example - but people whose identity is otherwise neutral are not, as a person, a/an [x] based on this particular example of their behavior. So if this is the case, perhaps saying "[x] thing you said comes from [y] culturally Xtian idea that is antisemitic," (for example) would be more productive and lead to a better conversation than simply saying "you're culturally Xtian and need to stop speaking over us on [x] issue."

This is also important because anyone can make culturally Xtian assumptions, even if they've never once been Xtian in their lives. Do you know how many Jewish-from-birth folks I've had to help unpack culturally Xtian ideas and internalized antisemitism that they were putting out into Jewish spaces? Especially (but far from only) assimilated Jews? It's not only a non-zero amount, but it comes up frequently. Because I've spent the last several years unpacking my own cultural Xtianity and intentionally assimilating into Jewish culture, thought, and religious ideas, I am hypersensitive to the intrusion of Xtian normative ideas and am able to explain the difference from personal experience in these conversations.

On the other hand, though, that brings me to possibility #2, which is that this is a privilege that is being described. If we're talking about the set of circumstances that one grew up with and the cultural assumptions one has baked into their emerging personality from birth, then I'm still, as a person who is now Jewish, more culturally Xtian than someone who was raised an atheist by atheists. My hard work over the last several years does not change where I came from, no matter how much I sometimes wish I could overwrite my past. I not only grew up as part of the privileged religious majority (and since I am white and was part of a mainline protestant denomination, I really was at the top of that pile) I still, to this day, know Xtian texts and religious practice and assumptions from the inside and can therefore speak to people who are coming from that place in a way that others without that privilege typically cannot.

That is still true, years after I finished converting, never mind started the process of de-Xtianizing my culture and worldview. Yet, I've never been accused of being culturally Xtian in discourse on here, and I feel like anyone who would do more than say, "hey - [x] particular thing you said seems to be coming from [y] Xtian assumption about the world. Can you clarify what you mean and/or maybe this is something you need to address?" is likely to get yelled at for how they are othering me as a ger. Even if what they're saying is true! Because it would be disrespectful to point it out by just flatly telling me I'm coming from a culturally Xtian place and need to put a lid on it.

So I guess I'll end by posing some questions for discussion. I am genuinely interested in people's different responses to this.

Is it possible for someone who has left Xtianity to no longer be considered culturally Xtian?

If so, what would it take for someone to reach that?

If not, why not?

Does the answer change if the person is an atheist/areligious/non-religious full stop, versus someone who has replaced it with another religion?

Does it matter what that new religion is? Must it have longstanding culture behind it, such as Judaism or Hinduism, or can it be a new and/or eclectic religion, such as many neo-pagan religions, Satanism, new age religions, etc.

What do our answers to these questions say about how we view and treat atheists, followers of new religions, and gerim?

Part of my concern with how we talk about this besides just the interfaith piece, is that it also gives Xtianity a whole lot more space and power to control the conversation about religion and interfaith discourse than it necessarily needs to, as well as sometimes starting a weird purity rabbit hole to try and get away from the "taint" of Xtian ideas. I'm just not sure we want to cede that much control, but obviously at the same time we need to be able to name Xtian privilege and the thoughts, behaviors, assumptions, and discourse that flow from it, so I'm not sure what the right balance here is.

(*For purposes of this thread I'm only talking about people who are not religiously Xtian, even though obviously Xtians engage in this behavior plenty and are the privileged religious group in the US.)

[iamthesanctuarian]

Untamed Authenticity

The Great Big Shift many of us are talking about so much is a shift of consciousness in humanity. New realizations, hidden truths, un-remembered vulnerabilities... and STRENGTHS. I've had an incredible journey, one that I am both humbled by, and eager to share. I find people can only take it in parts, though. And this is the part that is on my mind today.

I've come to this point where Authenticity is what I crave; the extreme lack of authenticity in most societies has begun to drive me batshit crazy. The level of deception humans are capable of really gets to me. But how does one go about making a change in this aspect of humanity's conciousness? I came to the conclusion that all I can do, all I can control, is my own authenticity.

Now, I had convinced myself I WAS authentic, that I was transparent, didn't hide my feelings about things, outspoken in certain moods, quiet in others, and downright mean at times. But I've come to understand that my moods are not accurate filters to base my perceptions on. That'll knock the wind right out of someone who talked themselves into believing that they could "beat bipolar".

I didn't really get true relief about how to go about improving the mental anguish until I realized that even if I define this 'condition' differently, understand it in a way that is NOT common, I still have to face the effects, the roller coaster, the dark depths. I was blessed enough to have a friend give me a message from my guides about this; I was determined to beat bipolar stigmas my own way, so anything else wasn't penetrating. But this vision, after thinking about it, mulling it over, letting it marinate in my heart a bit, really clarified things for me once I let down my own stubborn guard.

I can't just cure the thing that I came to do. Which is to say, that most of us are trying to figure out what purpose we came to fulfill, what challenges we came to demonstrate the over-coming of, for the sake of everyone. I am always eager to share my inner knowledge of how to deal with energy, such using the Violet Flame to transmute negative energies, or creating a special sacred space in your heart where you can go to feel your guides and angels, and talk to them when you're ready. Filling your aura with light, or transmitting light from the cosmos in the Gaia's core. But I wanted to believe all of that would 'vibrate me' right out of this emotional spectrum called Bipolar Disorder. My friend's guidance helped me understand that my purpose has more to do with facing these emotional extremes, diving into that darkness which sometimes, I couldn't even admit to myself, was eating up all that light I was trying so hard to emit.

So now I'm ready to talk about this shit. The fact that I was labeled bipolar at a young age, given drugs that are NOT intended to help me, but to keep me buying these drugs. My first untamed authentic statement: Pharmaceutical companies are not trying to create cures or healing products. They are creating CUSTOMERS. Theirs is a PROFIT game. Now, I can't say (though HOW I WANT TO) that I no longer take medications, because I do. And it feels like hipocrisy. Because I'm really very hurt, enraged, and indignant, about being made to take pills that are NOT meant for best interest, but for my continued dependence on them so as to ensure the profits coming in. I know this sounds harsh if you haven't heard it before; I would simply hope you will research it on your own. Don't take my word. Come up with your own conclusion. Mine has become insulted and enfuriated with the many varieties, the many side effects, the absolute determination by external sources to reign in my energy; so much absolute bullshit.

I started when I was 19, and I'm now 45. The drugs all proved to create way more problems than they helped. What they also did was create the belief in my mind, and therefore in my body (your body beleives what you believe and delivers the state of health you believe you are in) that these chemicals were necessary, that the side effects were an inconvenient and uncomfortable part of treating my 'illness'.

But our entire lives are based on, driven by, created by, our beliefs. And I believed the psychs and therapists when they said "this is what you have and this is the only way to treat it, this will be for the rest of your life, when you hit bottom and become suicidal we will hospitalize you, and when you are better we will clap for you like you busted a piñata."

So my authentic message for today is: we are living in a society that encourages dependency on 'authority figures and organizations' to tell us what is 'wrong' with us and what 'we need to do about it'. When you find out, however you do, that those pushing you in any direction, will only be pushing you in a direction that benefits them, I hope you'll start to question EVERY MFTHING. Those who only wish to help you, support you, etc. (and there are so many of this kind of person, soooo many.....) won't push, they'll just say "look there" and let you find it for yourself. We aren't here to find someone to follow, or to tell us how to live. We are here to live through certain experiences as unique individuals, and when it's all said and done, compare notes. God expands. This is how he expands. That's another topic altogether.

There is more to bipolar disorder than we've been told. The same is true for all mental illnesses, spectrum disorders, Autism, Asperger's...... on and on... they are about how one perceives, receives, processes, and emits ... Energy.

I won't go into that yet. My authenticity today is about saying "fuck this journey is hard, one day you believe one thing, then you're drawn to believe something else. You want to 'fight' one way, but your shown the more efficient, more spiritually logical way to deal with any given thing, and you grow. I know my body and I have to go through more changes before I can call myself medication free. It's not impossible. But it is a harder journey than I thought. But I want to document it, so that while others are going through this, anything similar, they will know how other's of us made it through.

If you have a mental illness, I hope you can feel where I'm coming from... not wanting to negate anyone's experience; just opening up more possible truths about how we deal with it.

I have much more to write about it.... but this is good for now.

[cciportfolio]

BRIEF 2- YOU PRESS- Scribers Hive

Reflection

This is the first brief that I've had to work on as a team which I think is helping to realise my role within the group. We began the brief by analysing the company logo, website and in doing so the user experience ( as shown below).

At this point in the project, we decided that the most telling thing for us to do would be to look at competitor companies and their websites to begin to understand the audience a little better. 

By doing this, we discovered that there was potential for a lot of content to be shown on Scriber’s Hive and that we would have to work to this standard in terms of creating a design for the website that would be as engaging as its competitors. The competitor websites definitely had more of a visual appeal to them which we believed was what enticed users to their websites. As demonstrated below, Aaron and I have analysed the user experience of their sites in a similar way to that which is shown above.

(https://www.wired.com)

(https://medium.com)

Following this, we began to reconstruct the brief given, but in a way that we would be able to respond to it using a creative approach. 

Once we had decided between us the things that we thought needed to be improved, we started to put together ideas for the re-design of the logo. We did this separately at the beginning to try to gather our own thoughts before putting them all together.  

My initial logo designs

After putting together all our logo designs, we picked the best three to develop further...

As a result of this process, we decided to go for a logo that would be simplistic enough to be legible from any size yet easily recognisable due to its strong contrast in colour. In addition to this, keeping to the colour guidelines provided, we opted to go for a gradient effect with the inside colours to suggest the different levels of creativity within the Scriber’s Hive project. 

(above and below) A representation of the sizing of the logo. Later in the design process, we came to the decision that we should brighten the original yellow to #eee225.

Login page:

Although we had all been delegated jobs within the group, we decided to start to begin designing one page for the website in order to show the rest of the group what we felt was best as an individual, which in turn helped us to develop an identity as a team (in terms of the overall look of the website). Following this, we were able to come to the decision that the website should follow these colours, features and look...

To begin the process, I started by looking at other login pages that I found on the internet which I felt were the most engaging in terms of overall aesthetic. I then put together a few designs using my bits and pieces that I liked from each of them. (SEE BELOW)

MY INITIAL DESIGNS

Once i had finished these, i sent these to Carol for her to look at and develop further.( Result below)

Home page designs

Although Aaron was delegated to do the final designs for the homepage, we worked together to establish what we all wanted to the layout for the homepage to look like so that we could continue this throughout the webpage design. We decided on curating the pages so that they were all simplistic and easy to navigate as the colours were bold and the typeface was legible which we felt could not be said the same for the Scriber’s hive website as it stands.(below)

UPLOAD YOUR WORK PAGE

I opted to go for the re-imagination of the uploads page for our adaptation of the Scriber’s Hive project. 

As we had already decided on the overall design constraints, all that was left to do was to decide on the placement of each feature on the page itself. e.g. where the logo would be placed on the page.

Below highlighted in the red box, is shown what we as a group would like to remain constant when navigating through the website.  

1st route

2nd route

3rd.

when curating the navigation of this page, I thought about what would be the easiest way to tell the scribers hive audience how to upload their work. I decided that this would be through icons which use well-known symbols. Not only is this easy to read but I feel that it also gives a fun aesthetic to the page.

When the time came to next meet up with my group, I discussed which design (shown above) would be most appropriate.

Upload your photography page (exemplary page)

1st design

2nd design

3rd 

 I decided that I wanted to simplify the layout even further therefore, I removed the ‘previous posts’ window and widened the preview box to make the aesthetic even cleaner. I decided that it was not a necessary element to include as the profile page would ideally showcase this.

MERCHANDISE

We felt that the best way to push sales for the merchandise that Izzi had created would be to allow it to be seen at crucial moments throughout the user's experience of our website. For example, when they are uploading their work the appropriate item would be previewed at the bottom of the screen.

PREPARING THE PRESENTATION

We all worked together to create a presentation that we felt would bring across the work that we liked the most from our project. As we knew that we were the last group to present we were advised by Steve Price who looked at our presentation that we should not continue to highlight or emphasise in any way all of the faults of the Scriber’ s hive website as they will have probably already heard it a lot that day from other groups. therefore, we decided to structure our presentation so that we would highlight three themes that we had implemented throughout our designs that would better the website. These were: minimalism, accessibility and engagement. We then chose the elements of our designs that we felt could be categorised under those headings. 

We also covered a lead up in logo designs to the selection of the final logo and explained why we felt it was most appropriate.

In terms of selecting who would say that in the presentation, we each spoke about the elements that we worked on individually and explained how we came to decisions both as a group and individually. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, I think that by working on this project, I have learnt how to be persistent when working on a project that I'm not that necessarily interested in but also how to work more effectively in a group but organising time well and knowing when to vote against something when I feel it doesn't work as well as something else.

However, I feel that I have built up somewhat a little more confidence when speaking in front of an audience.

[sagebodisattva]

Free Will and Determinism - The Context

So getting back onto the well worn weatherbeaten path of the whole free will vs determinism debate that's been going on in philosophy seemingly forever, and has been happening on and off in the online philosophical debate community over the past 10 years, we pick up the trail at the point where it stands to reason that one should rightfully demand proof of either of these templates. And that's the thing. They are templates? Ok, but templates of what. Where are free will or determinism taking place? Are these functional aspects of an external system, or an internal system? Unfortunately, from what I have gathered, it seems to be an argument primarily concerned with the workings of a supposedly external system, which means there are underlying assumptions at play in the argumentation that have staged the discourse in a biased framework.

So, even though it shouldn't be overlooked that free will and determinism are just abstractions in the mind and nothing more, we'll go ahead and address the issue around the basis that: what's called reality, may be some type of objectively existing medium wherein materials and forces, all very nice spooky ambiguous externalizations to be sure, are operating in some kind of systemic function that expresses itself via a paradigm of either free will or determinism... or maybe some combination thereof, such as compatibilism. Can any solid evidence be presented to disprove any these templates? Maybe, and in philosophy it seems we are often charged with this type of challenge, but really, the question should be asked: WHY are we expected to disprove them? Are not free will, determinism and compatibilism ideas that are carrying the burden of proof here? Why are these positions automatically considered established templates if they are not otherwise overcome in argumentation? Free will and determinism haven't been proven to be truths by any measure. So free will or determinism prevailing in discourse would be contingent upon an ASSUMPTION that they are inherent aspects of an objectively existing external world, which is a leap of faith in itself, as every and any conclusion made by way of philosophy, logistical reasoning, or scientific methodology, whether deductive or inductive, dogmatic or empirical, are all the end result of the mental facility of an existential agency. Assuming the existence of a external objective medium, that has some complex system of functions that either deterministically govern reality, or provide the freedom to act according to a will, are intellectual narratives based on the face value of appearances perceived in an existential context, which, by itself, is not strong enough grounds to declare free will or determinism as self evident axioms. Awareness of sensory data is a far more sure thing, and needs no evidence or intellectual narrative, as it is already the case first hand. So wherein do these abstractions warrant an assumption that begs to be disproved?

And by the way, while we're at it, on a side note, what exactly IS proof, anyway? We often ask for it, but rarely bother to examine what it actually is, or more aptly stated, what it achieves... More often then not, proof, or evidence, are just distinctions of patterns in sensory information that seem good enough to satisfy a underlying concept held about reality, of which, is usually the assumption, or wish, that reality and the mind are not at all interconnected. And receiving such a minor proof is usually sufficient enough to justify the broader unfounded assumption. This is the constant game we are playing with ourselves: this addiction of the consciousness to always reinforce the desire for illusion to be real and actual, which in this case, means mind independent, so as to avoid responsibility, and hence assign power to some supposed aspect of reality imagined to be beyond awareness. This is the basis of the foolish conditioning that I am trying to deconstruct. A deconstruction that starts with the undeniable truth that a reality, no matter how you wish to define it, cannot exist without having a context; pure and simple. This is a foundational principle that serves to fortify the fundamental axiom of awareness, that which provides the framework for all foundational principles. To call the imagined externally existing medium the context here is low minded and short sighted, as it overlooks that which gives context to the externally existing medium. This is the first impact that shatters free will and determinism: as there is no such medium existing. For such a medium to exist means that it has to have form, and a location, neither of which can be demonstrated to be substantial, outside of the scheme that gives any such substance or location context, that is, awareness itself. To be an actually existing external medium, this medium would have to be a parameter that is either limited, unlimited, or both. Just by virtue of being recognized as a parameter, we have to go with the limited, as being unlimited would mean no beginning or end; the definition of the truly boundless... and to be boundless is to be literally without any parameter. If without a parameter, there can be no position, if no position, no existence, as previously outlined in the original concept about an objectified reality. So since it can't be unlimited, then it can't be both limited and unlimited, which leaves us only with it being limited. If this reality medium is limited, then it satisfies the definition of a parameter. Since it has parameters, then it has a beginning and an end, hence the existence of this medium comes from some type of non-existence, but non-existence cannot exist, otherwise it wouldn't be non-existence, hence existence, as an imagined independent medium, cannot really objectively exist. It's an illusion, of the awareness which gives all these facets their composition.

But this truth is ignored. Instead, the theories of free will and determinism both choose to assume that such a medium objectively exists, and feature a set of rules within this setting, which thereby serve as the foundation for the eventual rise of an awareness, the exact opposite of the truth. This is a common conclusion when science is put above philosophy, when in fact science is but a branch of philosophy. Again, when considering many of the common questions in argumentation that look to address classic philosophical dichotomies, such as infinity or the finite, order or chaos, and free will or determinism, one should not look past that which gives these aspects context. Same goes for our proposed answers and explanations. Reasoning, logic, and mathematics are just tools, not the reality. One should not overlook what give these tools foundation. Scientific models are helpful navigationally, but become restrictive when used as a means to impose obedience to a reification of our abstract systems of order and structure. Might this tendency may be more revealing of a personal proclivity? Yes indeed.

Sometimes it's hard to fathom just how deeply we are always consciously and unconsciously trying to obfuscate and circumvent the truth, but this is our predilection; to wit, our desperate willful craving for delusion over the truth. And using material science to try and justify this attachment is ideological laziness. A philosopher worth his salt doesn't invest too heavily in the face value of sense perceptions. A true philosopher will never point at standard, traditional, or mainstream conclusions and proclaim them to be the truth due to their blatant obviousness. This isn't even remotely philosophical. This is just jumping on a bandwagon. As I've said before, to always try to minimize reality down to a mundane triviality, by way of material reductionism, or the authoritative disambiguation of the intellect, are the negligent workings of a lackadaisical philosopher. This isn't a representation of an interest in the truth, this is just an appeal to popularity. If you are self conscious about standing in the truth for fear that the popular people will laugh at you, or that it will ruffle the feathers of the scientific establishment, then really, you should get out of philosophy. The truth is never going to be popular. Delusion is popular. Delusion is like a warm fuzzy bubble bath, whereas the truth is like a ice cold shower.

So this isn't even a matter of the issue being complicated, because its actually quite simple. It's a matter of people deliberately not wanting to have anything to do with the truth, for the truth doesn't validate the ego. So, for those who WANT to uncover the truth, could care less about what other people think, are not afraid to take responsibility, are ready to take on more power and accept the true nature of the empty self unconditionally, a simple rule of thumb will suffice: when trying to get to the bottom of a existential quandary, and identify the most fundamental underlying truth, always distinguish that which provides all else it's context. This is where you will find reality. The truth of this realization cannot be denied, only temporarily evaded with clever abstractions that seek to portray it otherwise. But this faulty portrayal is the result of an improper focus, as both free will and determinism are illusions, as they don't actually exist anywhere, other then in abstractions. To concentrate on them is to lose clarity and diminish lucidity. Instead, the focus of the attention should be directed towards the source of attention. This is where we will find the serendipitous tracks of Rene Descartes, and the sentiment of his perennial aphorism, "I think, therefor I am", still echoing in the wind. He didn't explore it much deeper then his own abstractions, but he was, at least, generally looking in the right direction. There's no need to convolute just to uphold the imagined integrity of faith based beliefs in free will or determinism. Cogito ergo sum, or "I think, therefor I am", if investigated deeply, reveals that the "I" IS the fundamental reality, not an externally existing independent medium, nor a contrived illusory identity that considers sensible concepts in ontological and epistemological terms. So, with, "I think, therefor I am", one must move deeper then the thinking.... Is there any assertion being made that awareness is void? If awareness is present, then how can it be shown to not be the fundamental reality, when in fact, it's the only thing providing the foundation for thoughts, sensible concepts, and paradigms to be considered 'objectively', in the first place? What about the pure intellect as the fundamental reality? NO. It isn't the pure intellect, as Descartes hastily concluded, and as most of us so intensely want to believe. The intellect is a tool of awareness... so how could awareness itself be stepped outside of and be intellectually considered? Who, or what, would be doing this exactly?... But wouldn't the "I" be relative only to a specific type of reasoning? Again: What is the underpinning of the reasoning? This issue is gonna persist for so long as one remains stuck on intellectual inventory. So, until it's clear that there has been an accurate discernment with what the "I" actually is... it doesn't follow that it can be equated to a paradigm where an "I" makes sense only relative to a reasoning, yet can still be nevertheless "stepped outside of" and considered with a different kind of reasoning. WHAT would be reasoning, outside of the creature that reasons? For that to even be possible, the "I" would first need to be realized for what it is. If reality is realized for what it is, then of course it necessarily follows that all of it's constructs, including knowledge, are dependent on it for their contextual significance. This is the basis for the irrefutable fundamental default axiom of existence. This is the truth of awareness.